To Bind Up the Nation's Wounds...

The election tally was what I had hoped for regardless of the winner - a margin of victory (52% - 46%) that would be unassailable by the host of lawyers and partisans just hovering at the polls to mess with the election. Despite some minor problems at some polls (long lines being the worst), the election really came off better than expected.

For many in our country, however, the result was not as they had wanted. If fact, some of the more rabid right-wingers are not shy about their wishes to see President-elect Obama fail. They seem to want to be able to say "I-told-you-so", than to have the hope that our new President can begin to show needed leadership in so many critical areas.

Just as Mr. Obama used President Lincoln's words in his acceptance speech in Chicago, I would like to propose even more use of our greatest President's profound words. During the worst crisis ever in our history, Abraham Lincoln, despite the utter decimation of our young men in the American Civil War, still called on both sides to bind up the nation's wounds rather than continue the old parochial and harmful views of opposing sides.

As a country we must now come together; must now work toward finding common ground to settle our differences. Lincoln also said, "A house divided against itself, cannot stand". Maybe the last chapter in the "The Rise and Fall of the American Empire" does not yet have to be written in maudlin terms, if only all Americans come together where it matters.

No one can blame the opposition for their disappointment, and even their worries about what an Obama presidency might mean to them. But there are truly issues than can transcend politics if only they are tried. All can agree, I believe, that the economy, namely housing and jobs, must be the top priority. Then the wars need to be addressed in a calm, lower key discussion. We can tackle the issues of abortion, climate change, and other more contentious issues in continued healthy discussions, knowing that on some issues, we will not all agree. But we must wade through those jarring economic and defense issues in short order, or there may not be much else to discuss.

The U.S. can withstand a lot of punishment; we have the reserves to do so, but they are not unlimited. We cannot again start the partisan bickering that slows any progress to solving the wicked problems gnawing at our very roots today. For that to work, the government of the people, by the people, and for the people must rely on you and me - the people - to communicate to our leaders to get a grip - on their egos and party loyalty - as well as on the thorns that dig deep into our collective sides. President-elect Obama has won, fairly and handily. He now deserves as much support as we all can muster. God Bless our beloved land, the UNITED States of America.

What's in a Name? Hussein, Rodham, or Joseph

What a bunch of silliness. I have not yet declared my choice for President (except it won't be Mrs. Clinton), but this teapot tempest about trying to emphasize the Hussein middle name of Barack Obama is juvenile. As if he had any control over what his father's name was (Barack Hussein Obama, Sr.) The name comes from junior's Kenyan grandfather.

This, and the attempt to make Obama a Muslim (as if that is bad), the attempt to portray him as less than patriotic when he forgot to cover his heart during the Pledge, is all part of these political dirty tricks. I have forgotten the hand to heart once or twice and I consider myself a dedicated, stable, patriotic American.

I suppose this will go on as long as Mrs. Clinton thinks she has a chance at the nomination (she doesn't) because I doubt seriously that John McCain himself will stoop to that level of dirty politics. No guarantee, however, that some low-life in the party will see these kinds of things as fair game.

What's in a name? My middle name is Joseph. I am glad I am not competing for anything more important than maybe a Wal-Mart greeter position. I would hate to be have my name besmirched by associations with the likes of Joseph Stalin, Joseph McCarthy, or even Joseph Schmoe.

Republican Debate More Like Feud - January 30, 2008

It sure is nice to have the number of "debaters" drop a little each time. Easier to really get some depth from those still standing. I was impressed again, overall, with Mike Huckabee in his common sense answers, his ability to think on his feet, and his ability to avoid shoving out the the same cliched lines. I want to give McCain a wedgy each time he says "transcendent". Enough, Senator...find another couple of words.

I was disappointed with the Romney-McCain feud over what "timeline" means. So silly to continue that tete-a-tete after Wolf read Romney's actual relevant comment. So petty and not impressive. Of course, Mr. Romney has got to learn not to get so excited about some of the critcisms leveled at him. He reminds me of a CEO who has total control and therefore can intimidate his employees without risk. That could be scary in a President, I suppose.

Ron Paul continues to have good but Pollyann-ish answers. Would that it were true and possible, but the reality is that some of what Paul says is just not possible in this real world.

I like Senator McCain for a lot of reasons: his straight talk, his patrotism, his service to the country. Yet, I wonder how he would fare against Barack Obama. I think he would lose. A race against Hillary would be better for McCain. She has enough negatives that can be brought to bear, that he could win the country to his side. Any disagreement here?

Slamming Obama

I should have expected it. Once Barack Obama was getting close to being a seriously considered Democratic candidate, the slurs and half-truths start. Not so much with his current opponents, but those on the Internet wishing only to cloud the issues. First, I have to say that I have not come close to choosing who will get my vote in November (could even be a Republican), but I do have a great sense of fairness.

I am referring to a much-forwarded piece of Internet information that states Obama is a Muslim, that his step-father was a revolutionary, that he refuses to say the Pledge of Allegience, and many other half-lies.

If one takes the time to check http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/muslim.asp, you would see that most of what was written is simply not true, but with just enough of some tidbits on which to build the lies.

I am reading Obama's first book, Dreams From My Father, written in 1995 likely before he seriously considered running for president. It certainly is interesting and he does have a varied background very much unlike other candidates. But nothing he experienced would scare me away from considering him for our leader.

On the other hand, I am also reading Carl Bernstein's, A Woman in Charge, about Hillary Clinton and to the extent that I feel that Bernstein is a truthful, responsible journalist, I have decided that I could not vote for her -- oh, let me count the reasons. Another time, maybe.

There is so much negative in political races, so what little I can do to keep it above the line, I will try to do.